The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy for inactivation of biofilms formed by oral key pathogens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00405 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fabian Cieplik, Laura Tabenski, Wolfgang Buchalla, Tim Maisch |
| Abstract |
With increasing numbers of antibiotic-resistant pathogens all over the world there is a pressing need for strategies that are capable of inactivating biofilm-state pathogens with less potential of developing resistances in pathogens. Antimicrobial strategies of that kind are especially needed in dentistry in order to avoid the usage of antibiotics for treatment of periodontal, endodontic or mucosal topical infections caused by bacterial or yeast biofilms. One possible option could be the antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), whereby the lethal effect of aPDT is based on the principle that visible light activates a photosensitizer (PS), leading to the formation of reactive oxygen species, e.g., singlet oxygen, which induce phototoxicity immediately during illumination. Many compounds have been described as potential PS for aPDT against bacterial and yeast biofilms so far, but conflicting results have been reported. Therefore, the aim of the present review is to outline the actual state of the art regarding the potential of aPDT for inactivation of biofilms formed in vitro with a main focus on those formed by oral key pathogens and structured regarding the distinct types of PS. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 264 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 264 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 46 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 13% |
| Researcher | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 23 | 9% |
| Other | 37 | 14% |
| Unknown | 55 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 74 | 28% |
| Chemistry | 29 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 22 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 11% |
| Unknown | 61 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 August 2014.
All research outputs
#20,235,415
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,246
of 24,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,278
of 231,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#144
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.